You've captured my...carbon?

The Framing of Climate Change in Canadian, American, and International Newspapers: A Media Propoganda Model Analysis, by Jennifer Ellen Good, is way cooler than the title sounds. In fact, if I was a free agent in my life, I would love to jump on board to compare these findings with the framing of climate change during both lead up and after Copenhagen.

It comforts me to know that someone is paying attention to the writing on the wall. Because at the end of the day, while we are all busy trying to decide which light bulb to buy, our government (bless their wee hearts), is investing most heavily in storing carbon. Where?? I have no clue. In the Feds plan for Turning the corner: A Framework to Expedite the Suffering and Demise of Humanity, Harper and his loyal gang of subjects offer carbon capture as a solution to the large scale operations such as, (you guessed it), The Tar Sands. The comforting notion of carbon capture can captivate your imagination with such references captured from our expert devised regulatory framework as, "The stream of carbon dioxide is also sometimes injected into older oil wells to help extract further reserves of oil." And my personal favorite, "It is a technology that is most cost-effective when it involves large volumes of carbon dioxide, such as those produced at oil sands and electricity generation facilities, and when it is built into new facilities, although it can also be applied to existing facilities."




Yes, they have figured out how to turn this climate crisis into an oilportunity.
As featured in World Environment News, courtesey of Reuters, "Natural Resources Minister Lisa Raitt said in a statement C$650 million has been earmarked to help pay for large-scale carbon capture and storage demonstration projects as the government looks to follow through on agreements made during U.S. President Barack Obama's February visit to Canada.

The remaining cash will be directed to paying for smaller-scale renewable and alternative energy projects and a C$150 million fund for researching clean energy technologies." - May 20, 2009.

But to get back to the article mentioned at the beginning. What is startling from Good's research is that the international community in reporting about Kyoto, tended not to highlight the US opposition to Kyoto. It seems a no brainer to me that to mention an international agreement without discussing major obstacles to its successes is a moot point. Rather than questioning if the citizens of your country can ride their bikes one day a week to work, how about a little reference to the fact that the super power of the world, and top emitter, is not getting on board?

I hope that Copenhagen can expose all the dirty secrets that countries are "capturing". But we know we can't rely on the mass media alone. It will most likely have to be the chirps and tweets of the blessed unrest. (cross fingers)